Case law

Mansfield v. Chicago Park District Group Plan

946 F. Supp. 586 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 5, 1996

Under these provisions, group health plans must make continuation coverage available for qualified beneficiaries who would lose coverage as a result of a qualifying event provided he or she elects the coverage within the … (“Tort Immunity Act”). Under the Tort Immunity Act, a tort suit against a local governmental, entity must be initiated one year after injury. Id.

People v. Haleas

404 Ill. App. 3d 668 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Oct 13, 2010

Although Kastigar clearly prohibits the government from making any direct or indirect evidentiary use of immunized testimony, see Kastigar, 406 U.S. at 460 , [ 32 L. Ed. 2d at 226 ,] 92 S. Ct. … This burden may be met by establishing that the witness was never exposed to North’s immunized testimony, or that the allegedly tainted testimony contains no evidence not ‘canned’ by the prosecution before such exposure occurred

Horstman v. County of DuPage

284 F. Supp. 2d 1125 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 29, 2003

, that qualified immunity shields them from liability. … I cannot say that the prosecutors’ acts were shielded by absolute immunity, or even qualified immunity, until it is clear what those acts were. See Alvarado v.

In Re Linc Capital, Inc.

280 B.R. 640 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 18, 2002

The filing of such Complaint would clearly be an act of waiver of sovereign immunity, (Lapides v. … The wording of Conclusion “M” *646 qualifies the sale for possible application of 11 U.S.C. § 1146 (c).

Shanahan v. City of Chicago

777 F. Supp. 683 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 13, 1991

Daley and Orozco argue that qualified immunity shields them from liability unless it was clearly established at the time of Shanahan’s demotion that he could not be demoted for political reasons. Upton v. … The 1979 Shakman Decree and subsequent case law on the subject have clearly established the illegality of politically motivated firings of public employees. See, e.g., Pieczynski v.

Napolitano v. Ward

317 F. Supp. 83 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 5, 1970

His third allegation of a constitutional violation is that reliance upon his testimony as establishing cause for his removal violated his privilege against self-incrimination. … There appears to be a substantial question whether Courts Commission proceedings qualify as “proceedings in a State court” and, if so, whether the relief requested falls under the statute’s prohibition.

Sanchez v. Roth

891 F. Supp. 452 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 22, 1995

Qualifíed Immunity Defendants contend that they are immune from suit based on the notion of qualified immunity for government officials. … the doctrine of qualified immunity.

Hadley v. DOC

Appellate Court of Illinois · Dec 13, 2005

Thus, sovereign immunity bars lawsuits by a private citizen against the State in state court unless the legislature has waived the immunity. People ex rel. Manning v. … App. 3d 675, 682-83 , 695 N.E.2d 566, 571 (1998)), we ask whether plaintiff has pleaded facts establishing that he has a certain and clearly ascertainable right needing protection (see Local 1894 v. Holsapple , 201 Ill.

Halpin v. Scotti

415 Ill. 104 · Illinois Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1953

The plain language of section 10a clearly renders appellee immune to prosecution or criminal penalty for anything concerning which he may truthfully give evidence. … No prejudice will result to appellee from an amendment of the prayer of appellant to include the establishment of a new date for the hearing.

Jones v. Department of Public Aid

Appellate Court of Illinois · May 1, 2007

Four factors must be established before the trial court grants an injunction: 1) a clearly ascertainable right in need of protection; 2) the occurrence of irreparable harm without the injunction; 3) an inadequate remedy … The Department’s limited evidence on projected costs for individuals similar to Michael does not clearly establish what level of funding it considers would be necessary to accommodate individuals with disabilities comparable

Mungiovi v. Chicago Housing Authority

901 F. Supp. 261 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 2, 1995

Smith and Bradley argue that this court lacks jurisdiction over the federal claim because they are shielded from suit by virtue of their qualified immunity. … Such conduct, if true, should not be entitled to qualified immunity if plaintiff actually possessed the right to be building president.

Evans v. Page

341 Ill. App. 3d 486 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Jun 18, 2003

Section 202 of the ADA provides as follows: “Subject to the provisions of this subchapter, no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the … Although Congress properly and clearly expressed its intent to do so, it acted on the basis of an inadequate record and imposed a remedy that is neither congruent nor proportional to the problem it identified.”

Melbourne Corp. v. City of Chicago

76 Ill. App. 3d 595 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 4, 1979

Accordingly, to constitute a so-called “constitutional tort,” defendant’s actions must constitute a knowing or malicious violation of Melbourne’s clearly established constitutional rights. … That Melbourne’s constitutional rights were being violated was not “clearly” established until the decision of our supreme court and then only by a four-to-three margin.

Nguyen v. Lam

2017 IL App (1st) 161272 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Feb 5, 2018

Lam admitted that he never inspected the catch basin or lid after 1992 and a videotape and photographs clearly showed the rusted condition of the catch basin lid and the deteriorated concrete around the … The defendant municipality asserted it was immune from liability under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (Tort Immunity Act) (745 ILCS 10/3-102(a) (West 2010)) because it did

Rajterowski v. City of Sycamore

405 Ill. App. 3d 1086 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 1, 2010

When a law establishes a citizenship or residency classification, a court applies a two-part test in assessing whether the law violates the privileges and immunities clause. … The foregoing allegations are clearly conclusory.

Layfer v. Tucker

71 Ill. App. 3d 333 · Appellate Court of Illinois · May 3, 1979

At the time of the filing of the instant lawsuit the treasurer of Lake County had accumulated *792,653.75, deposited in qualified banking depositories. … Thus, this fund was not established in the original instance as a fund for the class represented by counsel for the plaintiffs.

Northwestern Life Ass'n v. Stout

32 Ill. App. 31 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Nov 23, 1889

Thus apparently treating premiums as dues, and the term annual as qualifying both. … The statute does not make provision for all of them the condition of the immunity here claimed, but gives authority to provide for all, or for any less than all, with the immunity upon other conditions expressed, which are

McCADD v. Murphy

763 F. Supp. 2d 1018 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Dec 21, 2010

Qualified Immunity Alternatively, the defendants argue that even if officers lacked probable cause to arrest, they are nevertheless entitled to summary judgment based upon the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Accordingly, the defendants cannot prevail at the summary judgment stage on the basis of qualified immunity. See Hall v.

Estate of Herington v. County of Woodford

250 Ill. App. 3d 870 · Appellate Court of Illinois · Sep 9, 1993

If plaintiffs established the culverts were an improvement to real property, section 13-214(a) of the Code would apply; if not, section 8-101 of the Tort Immunity Act would apply. … Moreover, they failed to file any affidavits to establish that there was construction of an improvement to real property.

Feltmeier v. Feltmeier

207 Ill. 2d 263 · Illinois Supreme Court · Sep 18, 2003

In addition to the three issues certified for review, the court addressed an immunity issue raised by Robert on appeal. … However, in this case, brought after the parties were divorced, “there is clearly no marital harmony remaining to be preserved.” Henriksen, 622 A.2d at 1139 .